The gendered implications of COVID-19, in particular in terms of gender-based violence and the gendered division of care work, have secured some prominence, and ignited discussion about prospects for a ‘feminist recovery’. In international law terms, feminist calls for a response to the pandemic have privileged the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), conditioned—I argue—by two decades of the pursuit of the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda through the UNSC. The deficiencies of the UNSC response, as characterised by the Resolution 2532 adopted to address the pandemic, manifest yet again the identified deficiencies of the WPS agenda at the UNSC, namely fragmentation, securitisation, efficacy and legitimacy. What Resolution 2532 does bring, however, is new clarity about the underlying reasons for the repeated and enduring nature of these deficiencies at the UNSC. Specifically, the COVID-19 ‘crisis’ is powerful in exposing the deficiencies of the crisis framework in which the UNSC operates. My reflections draw on insights from Hilary Charlesworth’s seminal contribution ‘International Law: A Discipline of Crisis’ to argue that, instead of conceding the ‘crisis’ framework to the pandemic by prioritising the UNSC, a ‘feminist recovery’ must instead follow Charlesworth’s exhortation to refocus on an international law of the everyday.

中文翻译：

---

国际法、COVID-19 和女权主义与联合国安理会的接触：事件的终结？

COVID-19 的性别影响，特别是在基于性别的暴力和护理工作的性别分工方面，已经获得了一定的关注，并引发了关于“女权主义复苏”前景的讨论。在国际法方面，女权主义者呼吁应对这一流行病使联合国安理会（UNSC）享有特权，我认为，这取决于通过联合国安理会追求妇女、和平与安全（WPS）议程的二十年。联合国安理会应对这一流行病的第 2532 号决议所描述的不足之处，再次体现了联合国安理会 WPS 议程中已查明的缺陷，即碎片化、证券化、有效性和合法性。然而，第 2532 号决议确实带来了什么，对联合国安理会这些缺陷反复和持久的根本原因进行了新的澄清。具体来说，COVID-19“危机”在揭露联合国安理会运作的危机框架的缺陷方面很有力。我的思考借鉴了希拉里查尔斯沃思的开创性贡献“国际法：危机的学科”的见解，认为与其通过优先考虑联合国安理会来承认“危机”框架对大流行，“女权主义复苏”必须遵循查尔斯沃思的劝告重新关注日常生活中的国际法。